ilkleyram

2 minutes ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

pre season games!

Bradford!!  Whoop whoop

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

I don’t see it like that. Do Brighton or Brentford get bigger tv audiences than Derby? I don’t think so. They are effectively getting handouts too from the big clubs. All it takes is for those handouts to be more evenly distributed across the leagues. 

It’s the same argument put forward by the ‘big’ clubs - we make the money, you redistribute it. Their solution is different though - we make the money, we should keep it. Let the smaller clubs keep whatever they can make.

Football as a whole lost the argument way before the PL came into being when the forerunner of the EFL agreed that home gate receipts didn’t have to be shared, that the well supported clubs, aka the big clubs, could keep all the home gate receipts (except in the FA cup because that’s run by a different organisation). They agreed it to stop (although they didn’t know what it was going to be called) the formation of the PL, because the administrators then realised that what is happening now would happen if the PL was formed - that the rich get richer and greedier and less bothered about other clubs. And that true competition would slowly disappear. So it has come to pass. The only thing they didn’t really understand was that TV money rather than gate receipts would be the catalyst for inequity.

In those days the game was run by better administrators than we have today, people who had more power, better vision, albeit sometimes behind the times (see kit sponsorship for example) and were better leaders than the bunch we have now. The FA and EFL are pathetically run, powerless organisations managed by feckless individuals with no leadership, vision or standing on the national or international stage. They used to be led by people who were better than the people who ran the clubs and, although we didn’t realise it, were more in tune with fans than we gave them credit for.

Mel may get criticised for a lot of things in this parish, and in some areas rightly so, but his views on the EFL (and wider football authorities) are 100% spot on. It’s to football’s eternal shame (and inevitable destruction imo) that in expressing his views he has been targeted and destroyed. In other industries he might be referred to as a whistleblower and protected.

11 minutes ago, B4ev6is said:

Well one thing when we had appley before we had wins over forest now but one thing is for sure there wont be silly spend but more danceable spending and he will got good links to good players in the uk and in the states and other parts of the world.

takes two to Tango on the spending front

6 minutes ago, Seth's left foot said:

I’d even take back Jewell as Manager if it meant saving the club ? ???

I wonder if/when AA signs on the dotted line we’ll get ‘that’ When Harry Met Sally moment…

It must be the first time that the words 'Jewell' and 'save the club' have been written in the same sentence for a fair old while

2 hours ago, Coconut's Beard said:

The indefensiblely uncouth behaviour displayed within their fellowship upon their descent toward an establishment more comfortable with the more civilised citizens of the circumambient conurbation! 

Yes, I did use an online thesaurus to try to find more alliteratively attractive alternative words for 'surrounding' and 'areas'. I could not, however, find one for 'comfortable' which would have been a more appealing linguistic suitor. 

Were you ever a scriptwriter for Yes Minister?

1 minute ago, Crewton said:

Hmmm.... what d'ye reckon? ?

Dad?

25 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Ha. You think HMRC and the EFL are going to allow the club to splash some cash over the next couple of seasons. No hope and …

 

Road to Utopia…….

9 minutes ago, WhiteHorseRam said:

I have started doing my texts etc in the Nixon-stylee -

 

Just going to Tesco ... could be pie tonight  ? big dinners in the days ahead..

Where shall we go on holiday? Beach holiday perhaps, or maybe the moon?

I'm in B & Q looking at wallpaper                  ?

Try Morrisons. Fish is better. Don’t know about big dinners. Little and often might be better 

Not got much leave left. Don’t mind where. Like swimming against the tide. Mars would be warmer this time of the season.

Prefer a matt finish meself so flock off.

1 hour ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Could anybody suggest a way in which this could be a bigger fiasco?

Yup. What if we’d had no bidders at all, no one willing to pay anything with Q trying to drum up non existent interest from around the world? Or what if the sheikh and alonso were it?  That would be a bigger fiasco.
From the outside it looks as if we have 3 possible bidders (at least) all of whom have good credentials for running a football club, one of them is so keen on winning our business that he’s prepared to threaten to take the decision makers to court in order to make winning more likely. Whether it will ever get to court is a whole different matter. This is a negotiating tactic first and foremost to put pressure on.

1 hour ago, CornwallRam said:

This is what I'm struggling to understand- if Appleby has made a bid, why is the process ongoing?

Unless something drastic has happened, he'll walk the fit and proper test. I can't believe someone of his standing would bid without secured funding. If Appleby has bid enough to take us out of administration and retain the golden share, why has his hand not been snapped off?...assuming it hasn't. Same would go for Ashley or Morgan.

The only conclusion I can draw is that the bid isn't sufficient to retain the golden share. So why haven't Quantuma said, 'no bids can be accepted of less than £21m (or whatever the base figure happens to be), as they won't be sufficient to retain the golden share.

At this point, surely it can't be that complicated - there must be an actual minimum figure, unless everyone is trying to square HMRC

 

It's probably because there's a process with timescales that allow new bidders (the Q press release refers to bidders who have had less access to the data room than others) to catch up, not only with the information in the data room but also the time to create and then submit their bid - in a similar way to the others so that it can be analysed on the same basis. The process has to be fair to every bidder and give every possible bidder the opportunity to bid.

What the process or timescales are we haven't been told. Presumably the EFL would like that to be early next week at the latest so that there's a chance of a decision on the successful bidder before the fixture list release but the EFL must be making contingency plans for that to slip (two fixture lists perhaps, one with us in L1, one without us?).

We've been told that they're full and final bids with no allowances, so if Q are as good as their word then we might get a decision in the next 7 days.  I would have thought that there will be two options over continuing short term player/staff wage funding - friendly local businesses and/or the successful bidder. 

The problem with the successful bidder option is that they will not become the actual owner until we are out of administration and that is very unlikely to be as soon as next week given the discussions with creditors/EFL and others that have to take place - so the successful bidder either has to take the financial risk or someone else has to step forward - ditto player/manager contracts.  The only ways that might be short circuited is either if Kirchner is the successful bidder because his money comes through or the successful bidder says that he/she will take the risk.

2 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

The question at this point is, what is the absolute minimum required to play L1 football next season? Is it just football creditors that have to be paid in full, or do other creditors need paying some money too?

Good questions and I would suspect that the EFL don’t know the answers. They want to release the fixture list in two weeks time - that means it has to be ready to go in about 10 days time.  They will have to make a number of quick decisions in that time, prime amongst them do they let us continue or not.  If they let us continue they will first have to be sure that we have a ground, enough money to see us through the whole season and a competitive squad ie not a bunch of 16 year olds. At the moment the money is the problem - there's more time to sort out the others

They could do three fixture lists - one with us in league 1, one in league 2 and one with us not in it at all.  I can’t imagine they really want to do anything other than the first because if they don’t include us then they have to make all sorts of other decisions that will affect the planning of other clubs and they haven’t really got time to do that - they know that any decision other than us being in L1 might be legally challenged creating even more problems. So the first absolute minimum is for us to have an owner or owners with enough money to see us through the season to the already agreed business plan, and a ground.

In EFL eyes, enough money means that the owner plus business plan can pay creditors - football ones to agreed schedules and others to whatever they separately agree.  Presumably some agreements had already been reached with CK.  CK going means that potentially those agreements are open for negotiation again - a new owner might prefer a 25% deal, for example; HMRC might decide that the 50% deal for CK will be 80% for MA.  We can, apparently, start another season still in administration and the fixture list can therefore go ahead whilst negotiations with creditors continue but I would guess that the EFL will only allow that to happen if they are confident about the money being there to fulfill the full season (and the ground) -  they will adapt their rules to allow us to sign players because they have to for us to be competitive. It would be much easier for them and their fixture lists if we stayed in business.

The fixture list pressure helps us I think - it effectively creates a decision point by which the deal has to be done. Or not. And in order to allow the fixture lists to be announced with confidence the EFL have to help, or remove us from the league altogether.  They might well not like us, they might well want us to go away as a problem but politically and practically it would be much better for the EFL if we stayed in business and in L1, even if they have to work out a way of bending some of their rules in the short term to allow that to happen. The only thing the EFL have done consistently well is bend their rules or make up new ones. Perhaps those skills might help us now.

3 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

I was once in Foyles book shop in London and I heard someone as for a copy of Dinning out in London and Paris by George Orwell. Not quiet the right title, but close, but certainly not in keeping with with the subject of the book?

They spelt the title wrong was the problem 

?

1 hour ago, Unlucky Alf said:

And not forgetting the heat...wow...May till September is was red hot ?

Is/was - is this a forecast or a report?

24 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

So here’s my day - I awoke Reading lots of concerning stuff on here I managed to cut the grass then I read more interpretations of that information on here followed by a nap , to be followed by the end of the world interpretation of our prospective owner trying to finish his round of golf with two superstars of the golf world. I then went for a curry with a cobra ( and the wifey) then I read more doomsday followed by we might soon have a new owner - I do love my Derby County 

How do you know Gary Rowatt?

2 hours ago, StarterForTen said:

Is it a Toyota Upper Tier (Central Section) of pessimists?

Aka the Tutters. 

39 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

I am very sorry for your traffic loss.

Congratulations though on your great news.

And I hope you and your son have the most fantastic trip. They truly are happy days.

Best wishes.

Traffic loss may have been an auto correct issue 

11 minutes ago, 24Charlie said:

We’ve been through enough trauma. I have no idea what to expect from CK and neither does anyone else. He’s a complete unknown to football. The game itself is not in his blood. He wasn’t brought up following football, not our kind anyway.

So we have a completely untried, unknown and untested person on the brink of owning our club. This is the first time this has happened to us. So forgive me if I and few other don’t share your clear view that all will be well.
 

To paraphrase Dylan Thomas.
Do not go happy clapping into that goodnight, Wolfie.

Every owner we have had has been untried unknown and untested in a footballing sense except Maxwell, you could argue. Some have been good some not. Some have been very good 

Ashley, the one possible owner with experience did not want us enough. Move on. 

17 minutes ago, 1967RAMS said:

Worse still they were using pink paint. Not sure I’m too keen 

Something for everyone. Smart marketing 

14 hours ago, CBRammette said:

Not a player I know but congratulations @Owen87ITK

 

Windsor safari park?

24 minutes ago, Abu Derby said:

My wife has said that I can have one as long as I don’t go to a single away game. 
Still waiting for an answer to the ensuing question: “What will happen if I go to Burton?”  
I think it’s 

……..what? The suspense is killing me

7 hours ago, Stagtime said:

Staying in Edinburgh for a month, first stop lunch at the Boozy Cow 

 

 

Blimey @Stagtime, I hate to say this but your missus has suffered a bit on the journey over.

22 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

 Found this online :

”Defensive pessimism allows people to be better prepared to face negative outcomes. A key aspect of defensive pessimism is imagining possible negative outcomes to develop strategies for action, should they be needed”

Fair enough, it’s not clear that one chop has developed many strategies for action. During the last two terrible years however, many of the more exuberant amongst us have benefited from being grounded by the perspective of Eeyore

But his race is run ? 

Which is fair comment @kevinhectoring.  But there's a difference between being grounded by Eeyore (and he/she wasn't/isn't the only one), being realistic about the possible outcomes to the process (which are still possible and will be until we get to an announcement that this is over) and banging out a constant highly negative refrain at every opportunity, despite the damage it was clearly doing to the wellbeing of individual members of this board, including myself at different times. 

In any situation like this there is a spectrum of view expressed - highly positive to highly negative - when none of us actually know anything.  We've had people who have been confident that all would end well but who have still been balanced, and no doubt had private moments of doubt. But we've also had people who have been highly negative, who have gone quiet in the positive times only to reappear at the slightest sign of bad news or no news.  Those people should, in my view, consider the impact that their approach has, or might have, on others and if they have done so out of malice (because they actually support another team for example or because they enjoy having that impact) then they should consider the part they wish to play in a decent society.  By all means hold a view but knowing when not to contribute an opinion is as important as contributing.

These have been a highly emotional few months for us all.  Aged 66 I have still found myself crying at times, in front of the computer; my life and mental health has been badly affected at different moments. The club means that much to me. The continuous groundings of Eeyores has not been helpful 

1 hour ago, uttoxram75 said:

No, poor taste 

Funny though

On 27/05/2022 at 19:04, TigerTedd said:

How many gooduns have they let go in recent years? Not just gooduns, but ridiculously world class. De Bruyne, lukaku, abraham is doing well now, I know there are many more. 

To a (slightly) different degree perhaps we might have been in the similar position of letting good/very good players go because we weren’t able to offer them a route to the first team, were it not for administration/embargoes and all the rest of it.

Judging young players with anything other than hindsight is sometimes a tough job given the different rates at which they develop.

Perhaps Chelsea fell into the trap of believing their own strategy - the Academy as a source of income rather than a source of first team player.

2 hours ago, 1of4 said:

To right it should be illegal. Between four and six is the most any couple can find a use for at any one time.

Any more than 5 would be distinctly painful, I would guess